Well yes, ~17 not 8 ... but MiB, certainly not Mb which is megabit and that'd be around either 139 or 64 of those .... the above calculation mentions megabyte [MB] which should now be accepted as a decimal [i.e. using factor of 1000] according to the IEC when talking file sizes and drive capacity whereas previously it was always, since the beginnings of IT anyway, considered binary [factor of 1,024] and it still is as far as JEDEC & Microsoft is concerned. This is confirmed by the Wikipedia link above. What's also confirmed there [albit timidly imo] is that MiB [mebibyte] should now only be used to denote binary but unfortunately sweet b*gger-all ppl do and that's not helped by the fact that JEDEC and M$ refuses to let go of the original sense of MB being binary [and good on 'em i say, they're actually right. Mac and Linux have rolled over though]. Similarly for binary: KiB, GiB, TiB, PiB etc for kibibyte, gibibyte, tebibyte, pebibyte etc. [the 'xxbixxxx' being a nod to binary] and so now kilobyte [KB], megabyte [MB], gigabyte [GB] etc is decimal as decreed by the IEC who were too wimpy years ago to tell the drive manufacturers to pull their collective scheming heads in and not misuse the binary terms as decimal. Result, total confusion and conflation of the terms.
So, the difference between 3,901,591,454 bytes and 3,883,335,680 bytes is 18,255,774 bytes, which is either 18.255774 MB or 17.410062789917 MiB and you can't have it as ~17.41MB unless you're Microsoft, or JEDEC talking about RAM size/semiconductor storage capacity.
Code:Please Login or Register to see the links